Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 101

Thread: We cannot dig, build, or pave our way out of economic malaise

  1. #41
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4233808]whats the alternative retrain American factory workers and college kids to pick fruit migrant? the fruit will go fallow in the field.[/quote]

    See, exactly what I mean. You clearly support an fully-open-border policy, so just say that directly. No need to dance around it.

    [QUOTE]this is the big tax that is killing the economy. The tanning bed tax.[/QUOTE]

    You said it cannot be judged, because "...it hasn't even kicked in. It hasn't even started.". Clearly, you were wrong, a page+ worth of things "have started" or were supposed to start. Taxation is only one portion of the lengthy effects of Obamacare.

    [QUOTE]the other common sense part that citizens would hate to lose in a "full repeal" is the less than 26 year olds on the parents health care plans. People are using that all the time, very popular part of the legislation.[/QUOTE]

    You base this claim on what? Did you see an Industry Report saying it's being used 90% of the time it's offered and appropriate? Did you see a poll )of more than a dozen (D) voters, saying it's wildly popular?

    I doubt you have any actual source tbh, but frankly it's no suprise that it would be popular. Same as "free cash day" would be popular. Sadly, all those 26 year old "kids" are costing paying customers like me money. I'm paying for their healthcare, and yes, I'm not happy to be having to do so.

    [quote]It's not a perfect bill but it's also not what's wrong with the economy.[/QUOTE]

    It's one of the very worst bills in U.S. History, specificly because of the Mandate as written, one of the most objectionable non-war-related things ever passed by our Government IMO.

    But I agree, it's not what's wrong with the economy. It's not much of a help either, but thats beside the point. We won't know it's full breadth of effects till well after it won't matter to Obama one way or the other.
    Last edited by Warfish; 11-15-2011 at 01:16 AM.

  2. #42
    [QUOTE=parafly;4233310]Agreed with the original premise, and the obvious question becomes what CAN we do...

    Criticism rings hollow without viable alternative.[/QUOTE]

    Give all the money to the rich so they can stash it away as it does nothing in savings accounts and trusts.

    75% of all US economic activity comes from retail sales transactions. Yet this country's economic policy the past 30 years has been to funnel all of the money to the top 1% under the pretext of "they create jobs, no one else does". Rubbish. Jobs are created by retail sales transactions, construction etc.

    I'm not a fan of the Occupy Wall St protesters but I do agree with their basic premise that supply-side economics has been an unmitigated disaster that has resulted in a ludicrous economic disparity in this country.

  3. #43
    [QUOTE=TerminatorJet;4233863]Give all the money to the rich so they can stash it away as it does nothing in savings accounts and trusts.

    75% of all US economic activity comes from retail sales transactions. Yet this country's economic policy the past 30 years has been to funnel all of the money to the top 1% under the pretext of "they create jobs, no one else does". Rubbish. Jobs are created by retail sales transactions, construction etc.

    I'm not a fan of the Occupy Wall St protesters but I do agree with their basic premise that supply-side economics has been an unmitigated disaster that has resulted in a ludicrous economic disparity in this country.[/QUOTE]

    Yes...the flow of funds to the top 1 percent is not healthy but taxing them will make the problem worse.

    Give the money to government and it is essentially gone. No betterment etc... ALL the money the rich have will not fix this problem.

    Scary but the world is flat and now under educated people that were protected by unions with artificially high(er) wages are exposed and their jobs moved away.

    Government can only solve this by not hiding it.

  4. #44
    [QUOTE=Buster;4233427]I was unable to find the Bloomberg report. Link?

    The plan was to get the money for the stimulus thru tax increases or closing loopholes in the tax code.

    Some of this money will end up helping the states via income and sales tax.

    Necessary American infrastructure will be created, fixed and maintained thru this stimulus money. This needs to be done.



    Some random thoughts:

    folks are falling over each other to lend the USA money at the lowest rates ever. Why not take advantage of that?

    If the repo-man showed up early Saturday morning at the US treasury demanding re-payment couldn’t the USA just sell its 140+ million ounces of gold in Fort Knox?

    Gold is well over $1500 isn't it?

    The Debt is a big issue, no doubt but it is secondary to unemployment. Debt is being used by the far right for political ends.

    We need to get people working, get kids to go to school for engineering again and then fix the wonkiness in our economy.[/QUOTE]

    If the Federal Government gives my town money for Teachers, fireman and Police because they can finance cheaply today, who is going to pay their pensions tomorrow?

    The school budget in my town has had its percentage of budget for pensions, none productive workers, go from 5% to 17% in under 2 decades.
    Don't you think that's creating drag on my towns ability to finance education long term? Don't you think taxpayers without children will be forced to leave? Don't you think young families will look at that and recognize the town can't sustain any kind of education for their children long term might leave?

    I can borrow money very cheaply should I speculate on homes, Stocks, Lottery tickets, employees, etc., etc. Should I take on debt because it's cheap and what constitutes cheap?

    Debt is real drag on the economy. Spending today that has to be paid back tomorrow is real drag tomorrow. You better make sure that whatever you spend money on today has enough real stimulus tomorrow to counter act that drag. The reason we are in a stagnant economy is an over hang of debt without the infrastructure and education to over come it. Much of that drag has been piled on us by the left.


    We have had decades of stimulus and that's the reason we are deleveraging today.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 11-15-2011 at 09:09 AM.

  5. #45
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,195
    [IMG]http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/PlumberKhan/DumbUSA.jpg[/IMG]

  6. #46
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4233435]I don't know how an economic discussion became an Obamacare discussion. it could also be possible that the extra layers could actually create jobs in the healthcare industry.

    first off I don't know how you can call this bill a disaster when it hasn't even kicked in. It hasn't even started. the cost increases in healthcare has been happening pretty much non stop for 20+ years, with or without gov't intervention. We don't know that the recent cost increases are because of the ACA. We don't know what the costs will be like after 5 or 10 years of life under ACA. it's far too soon to judge these things, and like medicare signed under LBJ i predict this will be a popular bill when it is all said and done.

    also, there's alot of good in that bill like not allowing insurance companies to deny coverage on pre-existing conditions. Or dropping coverage when people get sick. You want to repeal this law and allow that to happen again? does the American people deserve that treatment?

    Even if nothing else in the bill has any value that was a good common sense part of the law.[/QUOTE]

    For a guy that spends alot of time on this political forum for you to not understand that many of the Obamacare rules have already kicked in is surprising. We have dont many threads on this topic. Do you need me to scan the letter I got personally from Horizon that said "due to mandates in Obamacare Horizon has filed for a 40% increase in premiums with the NYS dept of health". That was in 2010. Luckily for me they were only approved for 22% that year. They hit us for another 18% in 2011. My family plan in the past three years has gone up from $1200 per month to $2000 per month for a plan with lesser coverage.

  7. #47
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,195
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4233969]Do you need me to scan the letter I got personally from Horizon that said "due to mandates in Obamacare Horizon has filed for a 40% increase in premiums with the NYS dept of health". That was in 2010. Luckily for me they were only approved for 22% that year. They hit us for another 18% in 2011. My family plan in the past three years has gone up from $1200 per month to $2000 per month for a plan with lesser coverage.[/QUOTE]

    That's cool, bro.

    I wish my insurance company had a scapegoat to blame when they jacked my rates 27% 2 years BEFORE EVIL OBAMACARE! They did it because f*ck it.

    :P

  8. #48
    [QUOTE=Buster;4233427]I was unable to find the Bloomberg report. Link?

    The plan was to get the money for the stimulus thru tax increases or closing loopholes in the tax code.

    Some of this money will end up helping the states via income and sales tax.

    Necessary American infrastructure will be created, fixed and maintained thru this stimulus money. This needs to be done.



    Some random thoughts:

    folks are falling over each other to lend the USA money at the lowest rates ever. Why not take advantage of that?

    If the repo-man showed up early Saturday morning at the US treasury demanding re-payment couldn’t the USA just sell its 140+ million ounces of gold in Fort Knox?

    Gold is well over $1500 isn't it?

    The Debt is a big issue, no doubt but it is secondary to unemployment. Debt is being used by the far right for political ends.

    We need to get people working, get kids to go to school for engineering again and then fix the wonkiness in our economy.[/QUOTE]

    I made the dollar amount calculation by dividing the 500Billion cost by the 280,000 jobs. Approximately 1.8 million per job. Note that even if the average of the 34 economists was wrong and you double the number of jobs created is still costs approximately 1 million per job.

    [url]http://factcheck.org/2011/10/obamas-spin-on-jobs-bill/[/url]

    Bloomberg News, Sept. 28: The legislation, submitted to Congress this month, would increase gross domestic product by 0.6 percent next year and add or keep 275,000 workers on payrolls, the median estimates in the survey of 34 economists showed. The program would also lower the jobless rate by 0.2 percentage point in 2012, economists said. …

    Some 13,000 jobs would be created in 2013, bringing the total to 288,000 over two years, according to the survey. Employers in the U.S. added 1.26 million workers in the past 12 months, Labor Department data show.

  9. #49
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4233964][IMG]http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/PlumberKhan/DumbUSA.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

    Germany is the size of New Mexico, with the Worlds 4th laregst economy.

    France is the size of Texas, with teh Worlds 5th largest economy.

    Japan is the size of California, with half the entire U.S. Population (127 million or so), and the World 3rd largest economy.

    China, lol Communists and High-Speed Train Disasters. Having High-Speed is easy if you want it in a country with no freedom or work laws and the 2nd largest economy on Earth.

    Russia, lol.

    And the U.S. has a high-speed train too, in the best area to have one (highly dense East Coast cities), you simply chose to represent the slow one in the picture.

    Overcoming the massive nature of the United States, the nature of our Nation (large Cities spread far far apart in different States in a State-Manages-Infrastructure system, in a system where all States want the same level of service despite not having the same need, and have the power via representation to make that happen), and the limited usefulness of High-Speed Rail in a Country such as ours (with Air Travel, the need of High-Speed for most areas is almost non-existant, and rail costs the end user just as much) all count against the development of High-Speed rail.

    Comparing tiny countries, with massive economies, with us is apples and oranges. High-Speed makes sense in small rich countries, nations who did not invest in highways to the same degree we did, and who don't have to cover teh same amount of space we do. For the U.S., rail makes the mopst sense as a lower-cost-but slower long-distance alternative to air, and (even more) as the local transit services brinign people in from the burbs into the cities (a la LIRR). These servcies are much cheaper and easier to manage, and serve vastly more people than any U.S. HSR system would under any projection.

    TLDR: Spend rail money on Amtrak (for long-haul, Nation-wide), and on local commuter rail, lihgt-rail and the like for cities that warrant it.

  10. #50
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4233832]See, exactly what I mean. You clearly support an fully-open-border policy, so just say that directly. No need to dance around it.
    [/QUOTE]

    Answer me a simple question: who will pick the fruit? Look at what happened in Alabama, they passed very strict laws, the illegals left, and their farms couldn't harvest. most people aren't going to do these jobs. even if they wanted to do this work they do it at about 1/3 the rate of the illegals. you complain about the rules and their enforcement but we don't have any alternatives.

  11. #51
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234059]Answer me a simple question: who will pick the fruit? Look at what happened in Alabama, they passed very strict laws, the illegals left, and their farms couldn't harvest. most people aren't going to do these jobs. even if they wanted to do this work they do it at about 1/3 the rate of the illegals. you complain about the rules and their enforcement but we don't have any alternatives.[/QUOTE]

    You support open, unlimited immigration policy, i.e. open borders.

    Don't prattle on and on (and on...) on my account.

    Just say it.:rolleyes:

    (and lol, "we don;t have any alternatives". According to you, thats the case with every issue of the day, it's (D) party-policy-line, or nothing. Funny.)

  12. #52
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4234069]
    Just say it.:rolleyes:
    [/QUOTE]

    crying about border policy is like crying about abortion it's a battle that was fought 50 years ago and one side lost.

    businesses, big and small, need labor. we don't have another plan. again i ask (for the 3rd time) who is gonna pick the fruit? it's not gonna be me or you warfish.

  13. #53
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234084]crying about border policy is like crying about abortion it's a battle that was fought 50 years ago and one side lost.

    businesses, big and small, need labor. we don't have another plan. again i ask (for the 3rd time) who is gonna pick the fruit? it's not gonna be me or you warfish.[/QUOTE]

    Just say it.

  14. #54
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234084]crying about border policy is like crying about abortion it's a battle that was fought 50 years ago and one side lost.

    businesses, big and small, need labor. we don't have another plan. again i ask (for the 3rd time) who is gonna pick the fruit? it's not gonna be me or you warfish.[/QUOTE]

    It's called temporary worker programs. These workers are needed seasonally. Plenty of folks are willing to come here work for 4 months and go back home.

    Our problem is with border security. We live in a country in which a significant portion of crime comes from the drug culture. It is a societal problem. We have spent billions on a failed war on drugs. The majority of hard drugs come in through the US Mexico border. Put a stop to it and it helps reduce the drug problem and the illegal alien problem. If we sealed off the borders most people would be for a path to citizenship for the current group of millions of illegals.

    Its the same problem we have with debt in this country. We have Republicans that want to cut and cap spending. Then if revenue hikes are needed they would deal with the issue. Democrats want tax hikes first than some temporary spending reductions maybe. On immigration Dem's want amnesty now then "we'll deal with the borders". Republicans want the border sealed then we can deal with the path to citizenship.

  15. #55
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234118]It's called temporary worker programs. These workers are needed seasonally. Plenty of folks are willing to come here work for 4 months and go back home.

    Our problem is with border security. We live in a country in which a significant portion of crime comes from the drug culture. It is a societal problem. We have spent billions on a failed war on drugs. The majority of hard drugs come in through the US Mexico border. Put a stop to it and it helps reduce the drug problem and the illegal alien problem. If we sealed off the borders most people would be for a path to citizenship for the current group of millions of illegals.

    Its the same problem we have with debt in this country. We have Republicans that want to cut and cap spending. Then if revenue hikes are needed they would deal with the issue. Democrats want tax hikes first than some temporary spending reductions maybe. On immigration Dem's want amnesty now then "we'll deal with the borders". Republicans want the border sealed then we can deal with the path to citizenship.[/QUOTE]

    How do you seal our borders? What do you think the price tag on that would be yearly?

  16. #56
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4233895]If the Federal Government gives my town money for Teachers, fireman and Police because they can finance cheaply today, who is going to pay their pensions tomorrow?
    [/QUOTE]

    I'm all for cutting pensions and converting them into 401K style plans or simply reducing the payout and forcing people to work longer in order to qualify for a pension. The US Military is already looking into that and the same should be done for civil servants.

    The problem is that's not a politically popular way to reduce spending. Really, none of the real ways to cut spending and debt are politically popular. Ending the inept war on drugs, ending the debt-exploding the Bush tax cuts for the rich, pension reform, raising the social security age etc. That's what has to be done but ofcourse the Teabaggers are more concerned with "gittin' rid a Muxicans" and ending the "welfare state" or whatever.

  17. #57
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234118] On immigration Dem's want amnesty now then "we'll deal with the borders". Republicans want the border sealed then we can deal with the path to citizenship.[/QUOTE]

    Ronald Reagan gave the big amnesty. It's not just Dems who want these workers.

  18. #58
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234168]How do you seal our borders? What do you think the price tag on that would be yearly?[/QUOTE]

    Create a demilitarized zone spinkled with landmines and patrolled by an entire mechanized infantry division. That would be so cheap and ofcourse guttin rid a muxicans would help create more of those valuable mop and broom jobs real Americans need.

    Eliminate the minimum wage, unions and cut taxes for the top 1% even more. That way the entire United States of America can enjoy the luxurious lifestyles migrant workers have been enjoying the past 30 years.

  19. #59
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234168]How do you seal our borders? What do you think the price tag on that would be yearly?[/QUOTE]

    Great question. For the price tag I would look at some of the money we currently spend on the greater war on drugs add in the costs of education and medical coverage benefits provided free to illegals and shift a percentage of that to boarder enforcement. Then I would look at the National Guard as a source for border protection. We have these soldiers on the payroll already. I would station them on the boarders and use them together with current border agents. Then use a combination of fencing and technological surveillance to get the border as tightly controlled as possible. It's not that difficult or expensive.

  20. #60
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234193]Ronald Reagan gave the big amnesty. It's not just Dems who want these workers.[/QUOTE]

    Reagan's lesson shapes the debate today. Reagan had a deal with Dems that following the Amnesty program we would secure the boarders. The border security never happened. Same thing with tax hikes vs spending reductions. Reagan agreed to tax hikes in exchange for spending cuts which never came to fruition. Later in life he called referred back to those deals as one of his mistakes.

    Thats why, per my earlier post, republicans today are skeptical of promises of cuts tomorrow for new taxes today. Or border security tomorrow for amnesty today (Dream Act). We tried that and it failed.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us